Marriage is a partnership. In this day and age, either partner can be the bread winner, the care giver or both. If they prefer to stay at home and can afford to do it, they should. If they would prefer to pursue a career, they should. As long as both partners agree and finances allow, there should be no guilt or judgement of what a couple chooses to do with their finances.

As for women who marry a man just for their money (aka Gold Diggers), they will likely find money, but they probably won't find happiness. In my opinion, this is a subtle form of prostitution and the moral baggage is about equal.

As for women who expect a man to be financially responsible, I couldn't agree with you more. Raising children is hard enough, without having to raise a dead-beat husband. The same can be said for wives who can't control their spending. Both are selfish and ruinous to the rest of the family.

I know this sounds very harsh and judgemental, but it needs to be identified straight-up for what it is.

I will have been married for 20 years in October and my wife has never worked. I have always supported her and she has always taken care of the children. At times, it was very difficult financially and my wife hasn't always appreciated how hard I have worked. But, I stepped up in my career and my wife did a fine job raising our children. We are happy with our choice, but your choice may be different and that is fine by me.

I want to marry a man that shares similar view and values about money with me. I do want the option to stay at home, but I may not exercise the option.

He doesn't have any issue with me making more money (he knew that would be the case with the career path for which I was training). I certainly appreciated his financial support during my training, but didn't seek that out. I have always been very independent, and would have gone down this path regardless. I suppose it comes down to how you were raised-I was raised to be independent, financially and otherwise, so I didn't seek a man to depend on. Others might have been brought up to seek someone to care for them.

Another thing: In the past I did date a guy that was perfectly capable of getting a higher paying job but was working for less than 20k a year. I have to say that this bothered me, but I think it had more to do wanting someone with drive and not dollar signs.

Considering 1 partner's income "play money" negates the concept of partnership. You and your spouse are in this game we call life for the long haul with nothing other than each other to rely on. How would you feel if *your* salary was flagged for essentials while your spouse's salary was for "fun stuff" and "extras". That invites all kinds of division as the "play" earner can reduce their efforts or take-home because their contributions to the family aren't as life-critical as the primary breadwinner. IMO you received terrible advice – you should partner with your spouse and fight back-to-back with him to protect and preserve your financial future. "play money" is a cop-out.

The baby-making dialog is also suspect. Fertility rates drop dramatically after the age of 16 and it's very common for women in their mid to late 20s (and later) to have problems conceiving. Children a wonderful gift that are not by any means a guarantee. If you're blessed enough to have them you should count yourself fortunate.